May 14, 2008

I set up a post so you could talk while I went out to do a meetup with readers at The Wine Bar at 50 Henry Street. (You should go there if you like drinks and food nibbles.) Thanks for writing so much. Unfortunately, Blogger makes it hard to see the comments after the 200th one. (You have to click as if you were going to comment and then find the word "newer" and click on it.) So please continue the discussion here.

Thanks especially to Palladian, who was at the meetup and then joined the conversation late and way into the early morning hours. (And who gave me some wonderful Champlevé!) Palladian had a great response to something Zachary Paul Sire said:

"I'm not concerned about one tiny blip of a state filled with uneducated poor people."

And I'm not concerned about one crime-ridden blip of an inner city filled with uneducated poor black people.

How does that sentiment sound to you? Sounds like the insipid blurt of a racist asshole? Well it's no different than the sentiments you and the Obamatrons seem to endorse.

Well guess what? The majority of America isn't concerned about one large blip of any city filled with over-educated rich people.

No doubt you are one of the important educated rich people who you seem to think should control the lives of the rubes in flyover land. Well you've got a surprise coming to you, O superior being. It's people like you, and your superior messiah, that have been and will be the eternal losers in the United States. It's the people you mock and disdain as hillbillies and racists that die for your sorry, lazy, worthless little white ass.

Believe me, when Obama is defeated, either before or after the Democratic convention, your premature schadenfreude will seem even more pathetic than it already does.

You're going to lose. And that's a good thing.

Go Hillary!

And a special thanks to my son Christopher Althouse Cohen, who kept up the pro-Hillary side of the conversation, including this:

Let me just sum it all up by saying that, come Election Day in November, I will be watching CNN-HD, popping some popcorn, and laughing as McCain obliterates Obama faster than Hillary could respond to a nuclear attack against Israel.

130 comments:

I would be interested in knowing how many of our liberal commentariat have registered the disapproval of Senator Byrd and the fact that the citizens of WV keep voting him in. Its not like this is a surprise.

And Palladians point about inner city blacks, places the show squarely on the other foot, IMO. I mean the African American population is only 12 percent of the population--sounds like a blip to me.

I thought she was supposed to win with 80% of the vote! She couldn't even pull 70%

I think the bigger election news happened in the special Congressional Election in Mississippi -- a Democrat won. The Democratic Party is 3 for 3 in Special Elections this year - all for previously Republican seats. Is this a trend?

Roger -- why should I disapprove of rubes from WV re-electing creaky old Senator Byrd. It's not like they know any better. Maybe that's the PSU Alum in me talking. I presume Sen. Byrd is bringing the bacon home to WV. If you do your job are your private views relevant?

If Obama wasn't black, all the super delegates would be going to Hillary at this stage. It is clear to everyone that Obama won all his delegates before anyone knew who Obama was. If primaries were held in the caucus states or redone in states like Florida, Hillary would beat Obama by landslides. It is clear that Hillary has a far better chance of beating McCain in the general. Democrats are now stuck with Obama.

Democrats are too stupid to realize that America is a racist country. They should learn to accept that America is racist, and just ditch the black guy, and nominate Hilary.

Still not waiting for a second post on McCain's preacher Hagee, who McCain is still aligned at the hip with and refuses to condemn. The same Hagee who said only last week that gay people caused Hurricane Katrina. But instead we get the seven millionth post on Jeremiah Wright even though Obama has complete disowned him at this point, thrown him under a bus, etc.

Sloan - If Obama wasn't black, nobody would give a shit what his preacher said, because people realize that white people are not responsible for what others say. For example, McCain and Hagee. Nobody cares. If McCain and Hagee were both black, then people would care.

That's why Obama is not only responsible for what Rev. Wright said, but he's responsible for what Louis Farrakhan says, he's responsible for what Ayers said (because they both were on the same board of a legitimate charity), he's responsible for Malcolm X says, he's responsible for what Oprah says. Sucks to be black.

It is clear to everyone that Obama won all his delegates before anyone knew who Obama was.

Obama took an early delegate lead back when he was biracial/above the racial fray. He was an African-American without any slave ancestors, therefore without any anti-white resentment, demand for reparations, etc. He was a cuddly Bill Cosby Negro, not a scary Al Sharpton.

If Obama wasn't black, all the super delegates would be going to Hillary at this stage.

If Obama wasn't black, Hillary's campaign would have ended long ago because of Clinton sleaze fatigue. Only the successful tarring of Obama with Wright's African-American resentment obstructed Obama's successful march to the White House.

For the Nth time: sane people do not make a comparison between the McCain-Hagee relationship and the Obama-Wright relationship. McCain is not now and has never been a member of Hagee's congregation. McCain did not spend 20 years in Hagee's church. McCain was not married by Hagee, and McCain's children have not been subjected to indoctrination by Hagee. In short, there is no McCain-Hagee relationship to speak of, which explains the fact that no one, other than folks like DTL, is talking about it.

If Obama wasn't black, Hillary's campaign would have ended long ago because of Clinton sleaze fatigue.

How do you figure? If Obama were a white guy from Chicago, everyone would be looking at his ties to the corrupt party machines there, and his lack of inexperience would actually be an issue. If Obama were white, he'd be John Edwards, version 2.0. Obama's not that inspiring when he's off a teleprompter, and without being a race-transcendent candidate, he doesn't offer anything new at all.

Wrong. Hagee has not apologized. And McCain has not accepted. Hagee only last week said that gays caused Katrina. I really could care less about what Hagee said about Catholics - I don't think that was offensive at all - in fact it was spot on.

Catholicism is a disgusting, bigoted religion. It has a huge history of anti-semitism, as revealed by the actions of the Catholic Church during the Holocaust, the Spanish Inquistion, it's refusal to even recognize the state of Israel until 1993 etc. If it's anti-Catholic to point out, then I'm PROUD to call myself anti-Catholic.

The Catholic Church also hates gay people, considers all gay people to be intrinsically evil, etc., so again - I'm PROUD to consider myself anti-Catholic.

The Catholic Church also protects child molestors, shields them from the law, and enables them to continue to molest thousands of children. So yes, I'm PROUD to consider myself anti-Catholic.

Republicans like Scalia, who oppose gay sex in private, and support intrusive laws against it, don't care about "criminals" getting anally raped once they are in prison. That is viewed as a legitimate part of their punishment. Do the crime, get it in the behind. Get AIDS as well. Downtown lad is right and Scalia and his supporters need to have all their holes reamed out to overcome their backward narrowness.

I think McCain has miscalculated a bit with the Hagee endorsement. He'll probably continue to nuance the situation in order to appeal to Evangelicals. Politics as usual--no one really thinks that McCain has a personal relationship with Hagee.

The problem Obama has with Wright is that he either has a 20 year personal relationship with him or Obama is playing politics as usual in which case he is revealed to be just another calculating politician. Heads McCain wins, tails Obama loses.

Pity Hillary's rural "low information voters" aren't getting the relevant information inner city blacks seem to be getting to make their own sound decision to vote for Obama 9 out of 10 times. In fact, we're so confident blacks are making a sound decision based on material evidence that we don't even question their motive to back a candidate based on matching race.

I'm not left Sloan. Try again. In fact, I'm leaning towards voting for Bob Barr at the moment. i just need to figure out if he's modified his view of the Defense of Marriage Act. He's already on record for repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

And I don't get your point. That I hate Catholics? Well - YEAH. Why the hell shouldn't I? They hated gay people first. I'm not allowed to hate them back?

And radar - McCain has NOT miscalculated on the Hagee endorsement. This is a WASP country and most of this country probably hates Catholics (with good reason). So that should solidify the solid south for him. So he'll lose the guinea states like Jersey and New York and Rhode Island and Massachusetts. Big woop.

You're as ignorant of architecture as you are of, well, everything else, douchetownlad. There's a difference between building another racist American hegemony tower overtop of a museum that isn't really architectural anyway and plastering something stupid on the front of a historical neoclassical facade. But of course, you trade in the broadest generalities. If I dislike one glass-and-steel excrescence, then of course I MUST HATE ALL THINGS MADE OF GLASS AND STEEL! If American voters don't like one particular candidate who happens to be black, THEN THEY MUST BE RACISTS WHO HATE ALL BLACK PEOPLE! You have a small mind and trade in small, black-and-white ideas. I'm surprised that you don't love George W. Bush, since you seem to share similar qualities. Well, except that he seems like a nice guy.

I only respond to douchetownlad out of habit and the stress relief that pummeling a stupid asshole provides. I do not encourage others to follow my lead. Downtownlad is a self-loathing, pathetic little faggot (who cowered in the closet until he was in his thirties), who probably has a lot of unresolved issues with his mother. Arguing with him only causes anger and frustration. It's like trying to fill in a grave using a teaspoon, and just as cheerful an exercise.

I do like the part about "repealing" a Supreme Court decision. Funny stuff.

No, if Obama were white he'd be Mario Cuomo, version 2.0. Cuomo was serving his first term as governor when he gave that transcendent speech at the Democratic National Convention. His only previous experience in office was one term as Lt. Governor. Therefore his political resume was as thin as Obama's. Cuomo's ties to the corrupt NYC party machine, inexperience, and the inevitable suspicion that any Italian-American has Mafia ties would have given him more liabilities than Obama, but still, he should have run.

Palladian- You're the ignorant one. Go ahead and even TRY and debate architecture with me - but you're going to look like a fool. First off, that "historic" neoclassical facade - talk about "dated". At the same time architects such as Louis Sullivan and Frank Lloyd Wright were building cutting edges designs across America, Brooklyn went with a wimpy historical retro-copy of bland European classical deisgn. Are you even aware that the Brooklyn museum has a steel structure underneath??? Are you aware that the addition won rave reviews from architectural critics? Of course you're not. Because you're just an amateur spouting off on a topic you know nothing about.

"The Democratic Party is 3 for 3 in Special Elections this year - all for previously Republican seats. Is this a trend?"

Yes. Republicans and conservatives are also sick of big government GOPers in office.

As a result, the Presidency is the Democrat's race to lose. And they seem to be trying to do so pretty damned hard.

"It's like trying to fill in a grave using a teaspoon, and just as cheerful an exercise."Jayzus on a bicycle, Palladian, that's fantabulous. I'd buy you a glazed donut from Bloedow's Bakery in Winona if I could; best damned things ever.

Sloan - If Obama wasn't black, nobody would give a shit what his preacher said, because people realize that white people are not responsible for what others say. For example, McCain and Hagee. Nobody cares. If McCain and Hagee were both black, then people would care.

Wasn't there a big dust-up when Bush spoke at Bob Jones University in 2000?

Mitt Romney was pretty much raked over the coals over his Mormon faith.

America is a racist country...

Is America unique in that respect? How many countries are not racist in some respect?

I dont have much doubt that Obama will be nominated, and I have even less doubt that the coming general election will set what progress has been made in race relations back substantially.

I hope your are wrong. In general I see his nomination as an opening for greater, more open discussion, resulting in improved relations.

Palladian, you bastard! I'm also fat, but I'm NOT eating toasted bread from Balthazar bakery right now, covered with clotted cream and Little Scarlet preserves. I now declare my undying hatred of you, because of the blinding envy I'm feeling right now. Grrrr.

Tis quite amusing. Talk about closed minded. Palladian is completely incapable of dealing with someone who has a different opinion.

How DARE someone say that a voter is a racist, just because they SAY that race was an important factor in their vote, and they ended up voting for Hilary, and say that they will not vote for Obama in the general (even though they're a registered Democrat). My goodness - that person who says that must be a FUCKER according to Palladian.

Alas, more making shit up. I called people a lot of fun names last night but not "fucker". That's boring.

And your little routine of coming on nasty then feigning innocence and fainting when someone throws nastiness back at you is tiresome. No one likes you, douchetownlad! People think you're ridiculous! We tried to laugh about you last night, but you're not interesting enough to be funny!

Anyway, I love that you're an architecture expert. Our own Howard Dork.

Palladian wrote: I accidentally burned the bread a little bit if that makes you feel better.

Well, maybe a little....

Madison Man write: I don't want a veto-proof Congress though.

I think we're going to be very close to having a veto-proof Democratic Congress next year, and a Democratic President to boot. Given that last bit, the more troubling bit may be the difficulty the Republicans will have even in mounting a decent fillibuster.

Palladian today - "If I dislike one glass-and-steel excrescence, then of course I MUST HATE ALL THINGS MADE OF GLASS AND STEEL!"

Palladian yesterday - "Fortunately that glass and steel crap will be easy to knock off in a couple decades when it will look as embarrassing and dated as orange glazed brick, glass blocks and brass railings."

And I'm sorry - you indeed didn't call him a fucker, you just told him to "Go fuck yourself".

How civil.

Find me ONE example, that's right ONE, where I've insulted a poster on here, where they have not insulted me first.

Just one. You can't.

Keep up the attacks Palladian. As I said - it's childish and just symptomatic of your inability to discuss an issue.

A substantial number of West Virginia voters were self-admitted racists yesterday. I find that sad. Palladian finds excuses for them.

Pogo - Frank Lloyd Wright was a prick to almost everyone, but he made great architecture - so why do I care what he did in his private life. It's irrelevant. It's his public life that matters.

Just like I don't give a crap what Church Obama goes to. It's irrelevant. It's what he says and does publicly that matters.

I'm certain Bob Barr hates gay people. And he's supported bigoted anti-gay legislation in the past. But it's his positions that he takes going FORWARD that I care about. And those are the ones I'll be basing my vote on.

If Obama, Obama's wife, and Obama's kids are all hopelessly indoctrinated and brainwashed by Rev. Wright, and there are other black people that attended Wright's church for longer than the Obama's, with more frequency than the Obama's, and were more involved than the Obama's, then aren't all those black people hugely racist subversives, too? Shouldn't be calling for their ouster wherever they have the potential to hurt us white people?

For example, say there was a black pediatrician that attended Trinity, shouldn't we be worried that he's going to infect white kids with AIDS? You know, because he's a carbon copy of Rev. Wright? Shouldn't we worry about white kids that might go to schools that have black teachers that went to Wright's church? Shouldn't we worry about black soldiers fragging the white devils in their units over in Iraq?

We've gotta be consistent here. Might I recommend rounding these people up and putting them in some sort of camp?

"Palladian yesterday - "Fortunately that glass and steel crap will be easy to knock off in a couple decades when it will look as embarrassing and dated as orange glazed brick, glass blocks and brass railings."

Yes, darling, that was my opinion of one particular glass-and-steel crap facade. It is possible to like both stuffy neoclassicism and modernism (and even post-modernism, for that matter). Just because you can't hold two ideas in your head doesn't mean that everyone shares a similar affliction.

Palladian, sorry to hear you're fat. I wrote a post about dieting that the charming Joan linked to last night when trying to prove to people that I was a gay 22-year-old. (Note to Joan: claiming to be perpetually 22 is an inside joke between friends--the only people I expected to get the humor of that post...thanks for trying to interpret though).

Ann, my heart fluttered this morning when I read this post...I'm so proud to see my name on your front page!...even if it was only used to highlight a voracious tirade made against me by the subtle Palladian. *blushes*

Clinton lost 17 contests in a row in all demographic groups, yet there was no hand-wringing about her "electability."

The fact that Clinton can win big in some states where her husband's strain of Democratic politics remains extremely popular shouldn't surprise anyone.

But the fact is Obama is winning this contest fair and square. It will go to the end but it will be a clean win. There can't be any reason in such a circumstance to consider overturning the results of the process. Why would anyone do that? It would be absurd.

Obama is putting together a coalition of states to win the G.E. It's not abstract, it's not about fretting about large demographic groups as a whole. It's specific. It involves increasing turnout in certain groups, by large percentages in some cases. It's a strategy, and it looks likely to work if bellwethers like the Mississippi congressional election last night are any indication.

It's McCain who should be concerned right now... Obama will make him spend money and compete in places he can't afford to. Obama will have a larger and more motivated corps of volunteers than Bush in '04.

While people fret, hem and haw and hate, spew double-standard critiques and a whole bunch of claptrap, the Obama coalition is going to take the White House. You'll still be talking about how he can't and shouldn't do it, and he'll have done it.

So consign yourselves to a sniveling existence of ODS (Obama derangement syndrome) for the next 8 years, or start to accept the possibility of a president Obama. Oh, and would it kill you to judge him on the basis of his actual performance once in office? Empirical reality is a bitch, I know...

Zachary - I actually don't give a crap about EITHER of the pastors. But the media should be fair about it. Personally, I'd prefer that NEITHER get coverage.

I don't need to know about Hagee to know that McCain is anti-gay. I just need to look at McCain's endorsement of anti-gay amendments to the Constitution that not only prevent gay-marriage, but prevent civil unions and remove health benefits as well. And that is a deal breaker for me. Shame, because McCain is pretty logical on other items (except for 100 year wars in Iraq and new wars with Iran and China).

You know, as repugnant as I find some of your ideas (at least the ones you express here sometimes) at least you're not a pseudonymous coward like downtownlad. You at least put your face and name to your nastiness.

And, of course, it helps that you're cute.

But I have a question: someone whispered in my ear last night that you're actually Maxine Weiss. That can't be true, is it?

DTL said Democrats are too stupid to realize that America is a racist country. They should learn to accept that America is racist, and just ditch the black guy, and nominate Hilary.

This may come as a complete shock to you but nations aren't racist, people are. If you think the US has a monopoly on racism, you're dumber than you sound.

Obama is trouncing Hillary and will get the nomination. Period. Considering that blacks who are backing him by a 9-1 margin constitute 12% of the nation means that he is getting the votes of the roughly 80% whites who vote Democrat to give him the lead over Hillary. If this nation was so racist, he wouldn't even be on the slate let alone leading in delegates.

Yes, it seems the press wants to paint a picture of white voters for Clinton as racist.

Funny though that I have not noticed nearly the same concerns of racism when Obama pulls in over 90% percent of the black vote in North Carolina. Was race an important factor in black Dems choice? That appears very likely.

A black person's voting for Obama is no more racist than a woman's voting for Hillary is sexist. In fact, mentally replay Hillary's comment about 88 year old Florence Steen -- I think it is just as heart-warming and touching:

tonight I'm thinking about Florence Robinson from South Carolina, eighty-eight years old and in failing health when she asked that her daughter bring an absentee ballot to her hospice bedside. Florence was born before blacks were allowed to vote, and she was determined to exercise that right, to cast a ballot for her candidate who just happened to be an African-American running for president. Florence passed on a few days ago, but I am eternally grateful to her and her family for making this such an important and incredible milestone in her life that means so much to me.

As an aside, are the supporters of Voter ID law not outraged that this dead woman's vote will count?

And now Palladian is insulting the Burmese saying they are all prostitutes. It's not like half a million of them just died in a typhoon . . .

Palladian wishes that he knew who I was. But I know that the wingnuts engage in the politics of personal destruction. I do value my privacy. I like to post my opinion (which drives people nuts and I honestly have no idea why - if you disagree with me then say so - what's the big deal). And I do think that people can't handle the fact that I think for myself and they would try to destroy my personal life if they could. Which is quite sad actually.

Hoosier Daddy - I have a deep dislike for any religion that tries to control what I do with my private life. Muslims, Mormons, Catholics, Orthodox Jews, Baptists, you name it.

Of course you have deep dislikes, otherwise why the commentary to let everyone know you have deep dislikes. Of course you have deep dislikes to religion that try to control (not really) your private life. It's because you are unmitigatedly undisciplined about who you are and what you do, therefore you lash out at streams of thought that ask and require that you display or acquire some sort of discipline.

You have every right to your opinions and ideas, but understand that most people don't take those opinions or ideas seriously when you write the kind of tripe that you do because they aren't generally based on fact or reality. It's mostly an emanation of your insecurities that you blurt our your emotional representations for us to read. Seemingly entertaining as they are at times, but don't think for one second they have any substantive meanings.

It's your direct assault on that which seeks to guide you in the right directions in life that you make your above statement. Like a spoiled child who stands stiff as a board, wraps their arms around themselves, scrunches their face, stamps their foot in a sign of defiance and says no to any modicum of rationality when asked to be somewhat respectful and obedient of societal norms. Defiance is your nature and that is why you blurt the way you do and generally that's why I think you might be generally and unhappy person, but people of your ilk tend to be that way anyway. Unhappy, disaffected, miserable sots.

The reason that West Virginia is important to Obama and to Clinton is precisely because of the attitude on the part those people who make no pretense of looking down their nose at hard working, middle and lower middle class people.

"I'm not concerned about one tiny blip of a state filled with uneducated poor people."

West Virginia is a concentrated block of moderate to conservative Democrat and swing voters. As West Virginia goes so goes that entire voting block across the nation. It is a clear sign that those voters in the fly over states and in small town America in even the "blue" states are not going to vote for Obama for various reasons. Some may be because of race, but more are becasue of his snarky and dismissive attitude towards them on a personal level and towards the values that they hold.

If he IS the candidate you can most likely expect that this block of voters will go to McCain or not vote at all.

Mathadras - You pretty much lost all credibility when you implied that Matthew Shephard deserved to die.

Ta Ta.

Mmmmm, this popcorn is really good. You really do like finding implications when there aren't any don't you. I invoke the name of Mathew Shepard and you go completely Judy Garland on me. I mean, wtf, it isn't like I asked if you if you Richard Simmons much did I? Get a grip, sister. Oh wait, you may already have one. Never mind.

So consign yourselves to a sniveling existence of ODS (Obama derangement syndrome) for the next 8 years, or start to accept the possibility of a president Obama. Oh, and would it kill you to judge him on the basis of his actual performance once in office? Empirical reality is a bitch, I know...

Should Obama win and actually work on implementing the policies he’s campaigning on, he’ll be a one term President just like Carter. Oh I’ll judge him on his abilities and I certainly hope his starry eyed followers do as well. Because his entire campaign has been on ‘hope’ and ‘change’ and I give him about 18 months before all that idealistic shit is forgotten and his swooning worshipers are still bitching about $5 gallon gas and the economy in the proverbial crapper once he raises taxes on an already tight money supply and works hard on driving more business out of the country with his ‘windfall profits’ bullshit. Oh and if he doesn’t give the order for withdrawal from Iraq in his first 100 days watch how quick his ‘base’ will want his head on a block.

See I like others are realists and generally take what politicians say with a grain of salt. But Bambi is ‘fresh’ and ‘new’ and is promising ‘change’ and he’s getting enough of the dumbass vote who actually believe what he’s saying. In other words, for better or worse he better do what he said he will although I think he’s writing checks he can’t cash.

Some may be because of race, but more are becasue of his snarky and dismissive attitude towards them on a personal level and towards the values that they hold.

It really cracks me up that people like DBQ who supposedly hold "hard working people" in such esteem think they are turned off by Obama's supposed snarkiness and dismissive attitude yet apparently they are gullible and stupid enough to be taken in by Hillary's pandering.

Hillary's and Obama's platforms are practically identical. If Obama is dismissive of their values then so is Hillary. If democratic voters can't see that and vote for McCain over Obama in the G.E. then they truly are stupid--or worse.

Only self-destructive over-educated elitist narcissists like Cristopher Alhouse Cohen who would rather see McCain win are short-sighted and selfish enough to torpedo their own self-interest in a fit of pique. Hard working Americans are a font of common sense, they would never do anything so blatantly crass and dishonest.

It really cracks me up that people like DBQ who supposedly hold "hard working people" in such esteem think they are turned off by Obama's supposed snarkiness and dismissive attitude yet apparently they are gullible and stupid enough to be taken in by Hillary's pandering.

Hardly taken in, since I wouldn't vote for any of these a$$holes. (Obama, Hillary OR McCain) As I have stated before this will be the first time in 40 years that I won't be voting for President. I might write in a name, but will never vote for any of these hand picked by the media and party insiders clowns.

Merely pointing out why the voting block in West Virginia, which is representative of a much larger group of voters nationwide, is important to the Democrat party even though they hold this block of voters in low esteem.

It seems the Dems are determined to shoot themselves in the foot this election cycle in the name of political correctness.

Whoever said judge Obama (assuming he becomes President) by what he does.. Sound advice and I am quite willing to do that. My concerns have to do with two issue in his candidacy: His meteoric rise from state senator to a run for president two years into his first term as Senator with no significant accomplishments. That speaks to me of ambition--a Cinncinnatus he isnt.

Second thing: his failure to take responsibility for gaffes during the campaign, blaming them instead on his "staff." A President who fails to heed Harry Truman's aphorism about where the buck stops, is not a person I want in the office.

If I can be convinced otherwise, then he might be worth a vote--although the sad fact is that neither Larry, Curley nor Moe in this longest of all primary seasons is worth voting for.

Some argue that the other "white" states voted for Obama before the Wright controversy came out, but that doesn't explain his strong showing in Indiana, his big win in North Carolina, and the national polls indicating that a majority of voters don't care about Wright. WV would've voted for Clinton regardless...everyone knows that.

30% of WV voters voted for Bush '04. They have a former Klansman as their Senator. 25% of voters yesterday admitted to voting for Clinton because of her race. If these are typical democrats in 2008, the party is in bigger trouble than they know.

It really cracks me up that people like DBQ who supposedly hold "hard working people" in such esteem think they are turned off by Obama's supposed snarkiness and dismissive attitude yet apparently they are gullible and stupid enough to be taken in by Hillary's pandering.

Or, maybe they [GASP] just preferred Hillary from the start? Republicans have learned long ago one way to get someone to vote against their interest is NOT call them stupid, gullible, or racists. When will you learn? It's sounds fairly simple and straight forward, yet it's pseudo-liberals favorite blood sport, and just fucking stupid beyond words.

Or, maybe they [GASP] just preferred Hillary from the start? Republicans have learned long ago one way to get someone to vote against their interest is NOT call them stupid, gullible, or racists.

DBQ and Cristopher (who apparently plans to vote for McCain out of spite) are implying that these voters will defect to McCain. My point is that I trust them not to while DBQ actually is insulting them because she thinks they are put off by Obama's attitude but unable to see through Hillary's pandering.

In the back of my mind, I've already envisioned an Obama Presidency and it isn't going to be fun. Nothing says veiled angry black man like trying to get Marxist policies passed into legislation cloaked with Orwellian feel good names. An Obama Presidency will equate to an Obama Senatorial term. He will run against what the Republicans will throw at him, he will make it into office, he will get nothing done unless he has a full Democrat veto-proof majority, not to mention the fact that Conservative Democrats will just look him in the face and say no to most of his hogwash, and he will be criticized like he is now for his lack of experience. Nothing new here.

Of course it isn't representative of all Democrats, however it is representative of a rather large block/demographic of Democrat and even of some Republican voters. Neither is San Francisco or Long Beach representative of all of California :-)

The point being that people like Freder can't conceive that some voters actually like Hillary better than Obama (I abhor both of them) or that some may really be voting AGAINST Obama and not for Hillary. He thinks they must be stupid to not agree with his own choices. Just like the "What's Wrong With Kansas" meme which postulates that if you don't vote for the Democrats you are voting against your own interests....(you stupid uneducated rubes). I think that people know what is in their best interests and the folks in W.Va. have decided it isn't Obama. Deal with it.

When you are given two crap choices you take the less horrible of the two. If it comes down to Obama/McCain in the general election, I think that many will either make the choice of the lesser crappy evil or sit it out.

I think the bigger election news happened in the special Congressional Election in Mississippi -- a Democrat won. The Democratic Party is 3 for 3 in Special Elections this year - all for previously Republican seats. Is this a trend?

The secret is they ran a Republican for the seat who is in the Democrat Party. i.e. A Blue Dog.

As one who bombarded by negative ads for months, The democratic that was elected is pro-guns, small government, and pro-life.

I'll take that kind of democrat over any of this current crop of republicans. The republican party should be lowering the lifeboats by now, but they apparently don't get it. Let them spend the a few years looking from the outside and then they might get it. Good riddance.

DBQ actually is insulting them because she thinks they are put off by Obama's attitude but unable to see through Hillary's pandering.

Or maybe its because they prefer to be pandered to than insulted.

While West Virginians may be largely Democrats, my guess is that Obama's Guns & God snipe in combination with his much farther to the left policies is what drove them to Hillary. She at least couches her leftism better than he does.

And that would be the case with many who are pro-Hillary, but are not pro-Obama.

Hillary's threats to nuke Iran, willingness to answer the phone at 3:00 am and dodge sniper fire aside (which again amount to little more than pandering), can you, or Christopher, please explain how Hillary's and Obama's defense policies differ.

I realize Cristopher is an Althouse, and of course they love endless pointless wars fought and paid for by others. But that is a reason to be a McCain supporter from the get-go. Not support Hillary initially (or vote for Obama because McCain had already sewn up the nomination by the time the primaries got to WI) and then switch to McCain because he is eager to get involved in even more misguided foreign adventures.

The point being that people like Freder can't conceive that some voters actually like Hillary better than Obama (I abhor both of them) or that some may really be voting AGAINST Obama and not for Hillary.

No, the point is I can't see that someone would be enthusiastically for either Hillary or Obama and then turn around and vote for McCain in the Fall. There is a hair's breadth of difference between the policies of Obama and Hillary. The gulf between either and McCain is huge. On balance Obama is slightly more liberal, but on at least one important issue, health care, Hillary's plan is certainly the more radical. I can understand voting for Hillary over Obama. You are missing my point entirely.

A black person's voting for Obama is no more racist than a woman's voting for Hillary is sexist.

I think you are correct. Sadly, some people choose who to vote for based upon something the candidate had no control over - things such as race, sex, age...

Personally, I prefer to choose a candidate based upon things they have control over - their actions and values. To me these are the things that matter in a human being.

Still, I have sympathy for blacks that want to see Obama president considering the persecution of blacks in the past, because of his heritage, and because of the historical nature of his election. I admit that I myself have considered him for the race reconciliation and breaking of psychological barriers that his win could bring about. I can also understand the desire of women to see a woman president, but at some point I would like us to be able to move past candidate selection based upon superficial traits and focus solely on individual merit.

The cracked pottery at the Times did a piece a few weeks back on voters in NC and IN and how they may have reacted to the Rev Wright brouhaha. Apparently not satisfied from just Maureen Dowd's predictable lunar yodelings, they dispatched their team of reporters to NC to speak with blacks, and the other team to a posh suburb in Indianapolis to speak with high affluent whites. What did they do you ask to get the opinion of less affluent whites? Ask the affluent white swells in the suburbs of Indianapolis to speak for the less affluent whites and what must surely be on their mind!

Garage: the hard hitting interview the NYT (or maybe NPR--no diff) conducted in NC was in Durham, in a bookstore adjacent to historically black college--now the folks there werent doing BBQ or hot wings. They were doing capucinos--And amazingly enough, none of the interviewees felt the Wright thing was going to hurt Obama. Who knew.

Why don't we take Pundit Joe's comment a bit further and reframe the issue as follows: anyone who votes for or against a candidate solely on the basis of the candidates race or gender is racist or sexist. Doesnt that formulation get around the all the wishy washy crap? It recognizes that racists and sexists come in all colors.

Freder Frederson: I like how you act like our policy towards Iran is not a significant area. Hillary would be tough on Iran and the security of Israel in a way that Obama couldn't. I know Obama tries to assure people--in the most abstract terms possible--who are concerned about this, that he is "pro-Israel." Problem is, being "pro-Israel" in your mind doesn't matter if you're not willing to actually do anything. And that's if he really feels strongly about the security of Israel, which I doubt.

Hey, think about this: Hillary is ahead in the popular vote now, if you include Florida and Michigan, and that's likely to still be true when all the primaries are over. But Florida and Michigan don't count and he wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan, you say. Well, if they had had real primaries that were supposed to count, or if they had a re-vote in those two states, the turnout would be much much higher, and the net votes she would get out of them would probably be larger, even with his name being on the ballot in Michigan. Only 300,000 people voted for her in Michigan. I bet she would win each state by margins that wide in a re-vote. Those are big, populous states and she would win by large margins. I think if we had re-votes in those states, if she's ahead by this count, she would be ahead in that, would-be legitimate count. Problem is, we'll never really know. It's not that she really won the election, we just never had a complete and fair election. But go ahead, ignore how unfair the pledged delegate count is, ignore his electability problems, exaggerate his lead. McCain's not that conservative, and 2012 is not that far away.